- From: Steve Harris <steve@totl.net>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 10:56:58 +0100
- To: Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com>
- Cc: "public-sparql-dev@w3.org" <public-sparql-dev@w3.org>
I suspect that’s less surprising than the alternative. There’s no lexical connection between the SAMPLE() expressions so I don’t see why a user would expect them to return values from the same solution.
If it was SAMPLE(?a, ?b) AS (?a, ?b) I would agree.
On 7 Jul 2014, at 23:27, Jeremy J Carroll <jjc@syapse.com> wrote:
>
>
> I was thinking about SAMPLE and feel that there is a bug with the spec because it allows
>
>
> A=1 B=2
>
> as an answer from
>
> SELECT (SAMPLE(?a) as ?A) (SAMPLE(?b) as ?B)
> {
> { BIND(1 as ?a) BIND(1 as ?b)}
> UNION
> { BIND(2 as ?a) BIND(2 as ?b)}
> }
>
>
> I think the principal of least surprise would suggest that a single select should use the same solution to pick out the sample values, giving either 1,1 or 2,2 as possible solutions here.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 July 2014 10:02:50 UTC